Patterns of organizational structures – headmasters imagining how to meet pressure from marketization and accountability policy In the beginning of the new millennium the upper secondary school (gymnasium) in Denmark was exposed to two comprehensive reforms. The 2005-reform intended to promote a ‘competence-based education’, which involved new subjects’ curricula, the use of a wide variety of teaching methods and a mandatory team organization of the teachers. At the same time new systems of quality control was implemented. The 2007-reform concerned the self-governing of the institutions and marketization. All in all it increased the pressure of for change. The question is: How do the headmasters imagine an organizational structure that may cope with these new demands for change and development? A study based on interviews with school leaders points out three patterns of structures – a ‘flat structure’ (the structure of the classic professional organization following Mintzberg), a centralized structure (the bureaucracy pattern) and a form, which may be called ‘leading through the middle’ (delegation of influence to committees or taskforces with the participation of both teachers and their leaders). Despite great political pressure for efficient and clear organizational structures, easily manageable from the top, a varying number of committees survive – even in the most centralized model. This may be understood as a micro-political compromise. The study, however, claims that this tendency is to be understood as the headmasters’ attempt at combining an instrumental and a representative organization perspective on structures – as the school leaders attempt to create new fora of negotiation of professional meaning.

Qualitative, based on interviews with a minor sample of headmasters of danish upper secondary schools

Three patterns of structures are identified - even in the most centralized pattern you will find formalized 'fora', a tendency which is understood as the need of negotiatiation of meaning.